The Avengers + movie theatre etiquette

So I have an idea for a one-panel editorial cartoon. A guy shows up to a gigantic movie theater that’s totally empty except for one guy sitting in the exact middle of the theater who tells him, “Oh, sorry, every single seat in here is reserved.”

Look, I’m just going to be blunt here: if you’re saving a seat for more than one person (who should probably be your significant other) who hasn’t yet arrived at the theater, you’re an asshole. You know why I usually go through the trouble to get to the theater well in advance of a movie starting? It’s so that I have my choice of goddamn seats. When I get there and there’s some dude who got there one minute before I did and then claimed 10 seats of prime real estate for his nine buddies who don’t even show up until five minutes after the movie starts, that pisses me off to no end.

It’s simple–if you want to sit next to your friends, then fucking get there at the same time as your friends and go in together. I really think that as a society we need to just say “no” to seat saving at the movie theater. I know it sounds dumb, but ultimately, this is going to be the thing that finally causes me to either punch somebody in the face someday or get punched in the face. I don’t know why of all the shitty and obnoxious things that people do, this irks me almost more than anything else. But it does.*

Moving on…

The Avengers (2012)

Rating: ★★★★★ 

I haven’t been to see a movie in the theater in the over year and a half since my daughter was born, so if I am perhaps overly excited about The Avengers, it may be down to my renewed thrill at seeing an action movie as it is intended to be seen: viz., 10 times larger than life and so loud it makes your ears bleed. I’m not going to spend a ton of time reviewing this in any real sense, since my friend Donald at Blessed Are the Geeks wrote a fine review of why this film is so good. I want only to make a few comments.

Donald makes the point in his review (not necessarily as a criticism) that these are not the Avengers with which he grew up. That may very well be true. I didn’t grow up reading about the Avengers, as I only really discovered comic books as a teenager. But with that said, these are the Avengers with which I wish I had grown up.

While the renderings of these characters’ personalities may owe more to The Ultimates than to The Avengers, I’m fine with that, as I think The Ultimates was one of a few revamps that really and truly worked in a way that didn’t seem gimmicky yet managed to create characters that felt like the more canonical personalities and yet also seemed fresh and fully-realized in their own right. I was a big fan of the first two volumes of The Ultimates.

To be sure, what the filmmakers delivered in the film is not the Ultimates–not exactly, anyway (for one thing, the characters are not mean-spirited in the way that Mark Millar sometimes wrote them). It’s more of a blending of the traditional characters and the Ultimate versions. And it works very well at giving us something we haven’t quite seen before.

Ultimately, however, this film was successful because each character’s arc was so well written and instrumental in driving forward the narrative. There were no wasted characters in this film, and at the point that the film finally coheres these individual heroes into a team, it felt like a very genuine and inspiring moment, because of the many plot threads that had to be woven together to make it work. Say what you will about Joss Whedon’s characteristically snarky dialogue (with which I happen to be fine), but his sense of narrative structure was completely on point here.

Some other remarks:

  • I really enjoyed Mark Ruffalo’s portrayal of Bruce Banner. He adopted this somewhat cowed posture as though perpetually clenching, and delivered his lines like a man who is affecting an appearance of calm while a great turmoil bubbles just beneath the surface. Later in the film, when he is finally recruited to the cause of the Avengers Initiative, his line there made perfect sense in the context of Ruffalo’s performance. And just as a concept of the Hulk, this brought back what I liked about the film starring Eric Bana–the notion that the Hulk really is just another aspect of Banner’s personality made manifest. Banner, himself, is a guy with a lot of issues.
  • Visually, it was also interesting how the CG Hulk kind of looked like Ruffalo. Though I’ve got to tell you…I’ve been rewatching Ang Lee’s Hulk a lot lately because my daughter likes it, and that version of the Hulk still looks friggin’ amazing to me. That version of the Hulk is easily, in my opinion, the best actor of any Hulk we’ve ever seen animated, and it’s so flawlessly integrated into the scenery that I sometimes forget I’m watching CG–maybe that’s also to do with all the real-world environments Lee was able to use (e.g., the desert). Admittedly, it’s harder to pull that off when you’re burdened with destroying New York City.
  • But to be sure about it, this one definitely looked the most like Jack Kirby’s Hulk brought to life.
  • About ten seconds before the last second teaser to the next film’s villain, I guessed where they were going, and I practically jumped out of my seat. I won’t spoil it, but if you know anything about me, you know that this is hands down my favorite comic book villain and I hope they don’t mess it up and that he is, actually, the main villain in the sequel and not simply relegated to the sidelines.

Anyway, I could probably go on and on about the things I liked in this film, but I’ll drop it there for now. If I could pre-order the DVD now, I’d do it.


*Now that you’ve read that, read this: Your Complete Guide to Saving Movie Theater Seats; or this: Boiling Point! Seat Saver’s Etiquette

Political films and propaganda

Okay, another completely absurd review from the Internet Movie Database with regards to The Ides of March. I’m sharing this one not only because it’s barely literate and nonsensical, but also because I think that in a weird way, it kind of explains why Ides was a pretty good film.

Political trash and half baked propaganda, 31 March 2012

1/10

Author: fwarleader from United States

 

Nonsense political garbage. Don’t bother the acting isn’t even good 2d characters.

 

I don’t need to write a great deal about it because it isn’t worth it. I mean Clooney liberal loon is enough to know what is going to happen. Of course he isn’t a “bad guy” ridiculous.

 

Typical stereotyping, even down to the “Arkansas” Gov. With sex and interns thrown in too. As if the last Arkansas Gov turned President had any honor.

 

Acting was weak, plot sucked and by mid movie it was an emotional Hollywood fantasy “human character” hack job. The movie just falls apart totally. I suppose if you are a Democrat drone you may enjoy the lies and propaganda that Clooney spouts off about same old tired nonsense. However didn’t expect more glad I got it at redbox for a dollar.

So here’s the thing about this film: the politics of the protagonists are almost entirely inconsequential. The screenwriters could have very easily revised George Clooney’s character to be a Republican candidate for president without changing in any way the narrative.

But the irony of this is that had the film taken that tack, I would lay a pretty sizable sum of money on the liklihood that this very same reviewer would have shown up to the IMDb to complain about Hollywood’s penchant for depicting conservatives as hypocritical sell-outs with loose morals.

The fact that anybody could call The Ides of March liberal propaganda is almost mind-blowing. Every single character in this film compromises on every last promise to himself. Hell, even the reporter from the “liberal” New York Times is portrayed as a person not above blackmail in the typical course of getting a story.

Propaganda. Sheesh. To quote Bugs Bunny, “What a maroon.”

Somebody please kick this guy in the balls

I watched The Ides of March tonight, and so I’m doing my customary activity of reading user reviews on the Internet Movie Database just to see how my appraisal holds up against other common men and women. I found it to be a fairly well-layered story, by the way, that I’m still working to fully peel apart in my mind. I liked it.

Anyway, what follows is amongst the most obnoxious reviews I’ve read in my entire life. There isn’t a single line within that is actually coherent, but the hilarious thing about it is how goddamn awesome this guy thinks he is because of his facility with a thesaurus. It’s so god-awful, it must be shared. And no, I’m not going to cut him any slack just because he’s from Prague. This shit reeks with the arrogance of stupidity in any language.

The Ides of March, 6 March 2012

6/10

Author: junkielee from Prague

 

Political thriller is generally favored by the orthodox mass, as it hinges on an abiding gist: the pitch-dark side of politicians and their marionettes. But as a fact it will never own the impact on an social level to substantially transform the framework, so it only function is to appease the jealousy and complaint from our average joe with a fawningly condescending feeling as such “you know, it’s not easy to be a politician, so give them a break, they are literally assholes, you are much better than them!”. Of course, initially we all gloat to hear that, but time and time again, it may run to the other pole and intrigue an even more essential dislike towards the rotting upper structure and films that endorse the indulgence.

George Clooney’s directional work is on a par with his acting knack, so excellency might be overstated, but he can fabricate an arresting film without any difficulties (GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK. 2005, a 7/10, is stylishly chic while the plot line can shun many entries from a wide audience). In THE IDES OF MARCH, the entire exposition is more feasible to understand while a fatal setback is the corny tenor wrapped with a feather-weight crowd-pleasing script (adapted from Beau Willimon’s play FARRAGUT NORTH). An over-simplified approach to elaborate a political puzzle, it does hurt the film.

The acting is high-end and Ryan Gosling has again triumphantly invaded into anther genre to broaden his bent to be the next virtuoso. Inside the supporting group, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Evan Rachel Wood are my pick of prominence, Clooney himself, Paul Giamatti and Marisa Tomei are all dedicated without any glitch. And a big thumb to the unswervingly composed camera-work!

cable television = worthless

Can we all just admit that channels like The History Channel, National Geographic, Animal Planet, and other themed channels in this vain have completely jumped the shark? You know, they’re so terrible that they actually made me use the expression “jumped the shark”, which is an expression I sort of hate. But really, all of these channels that used to be my go-tos when I just wanted to kill some time watching something interesting on television are now almost completely piled up with reality show dreck.

I realize I’m not saying anything new or remotely original here, but I just wanted my small voice to be yet one more in the chorus of people around the country who absolutely hate the direction in which these channels have gone. So just to be clear here:

The History Channel sucks.

Animal Planet sucks.

National Geographic sucks.

And there are probably a bunch of other sucky channels too that no longer bear any resemblance to the purpose for which they were originally created. Thinking about it, Comedy Central may be the only channel left that has really stayed true to its intention. Hell, even Cartoon Network has started showing shit like gameshows.

Drive, Fast Five, Star Wars: The Old Republic

So I’m moving this blog onto a semi-annual schedule. ha ha.

Well, yeah, it’s clear that I no longer have any will to keep this blog regular updated, but I’ll post a few things just for the hell of it, and because there are maybe two people out there who might actually care.

Drive (2011)

Rating: ★★★☆☆ 

They should have just called this film The Transporter 4. Seriously. Same movie.

Surprisingly positive reviews–from both regular people and critics–notwithstanding, I really wasn’t overly impressed with the film. This was a movie in which the lead character was a cipher (I just read a review on the IMDb where the user called him a “nice guy psychopath”, and I thought that was both funny and pretty apt), and the only things keeping your interest were the performances by the supporting players. Bryan Cranston and Ron Perlman were predictably reliable, though Albert Brooks walked away with the film.

But none of it felt like quite enough. The plot was a bit too straightforward, and the main character’s motivation was obscured by his total inscrutability. Also, I wouldn’t mind if somebody would explain to me why the soundtrack was all retro-80s European.

On a side note, Albert Brooks is the sort of actor who should really just be in every movie. He’s always entertaining.

Fast Five (2011)

Rating: ★★☆☆☆ 

At the risk of having to forfeit my membership to the “guy movie” fanclub (which maybe I already did when I slammed The Expendables), I’m just going to be honest here: this movie blew. Paul Walker is still one of the shittiest actors on the planet, the narrative was even more cartoonish than usual–it attempted to pull off a heist plotline in a half-hearted way that merely subtracted time we might have actually been seeing car racing–the characters are all ridiculous, the dialogue was cringe-worthy…do I need to go on?

I mean, I didn’t exact hate watching it. My wife and I had some good chuckles about how cheesy it all was. And the final chase sequence in which two cars dragged a giant metal vault through city streets was neat. But all in all, these films have drifted further and further from where they started out. Not that I’m trying to hold up The Fast and the Furious as some sort of paragon of filmmaking, but it at least kind of attempted to be a real movie.

Okay, enough about movies. Let’s move onto video games.

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Rating: ★★★★★ 

If you’ve been paying attention, you probably noticed me talking about this game for the past few years. Yes, I’m one of these nerds who preordered the game and was logged in about two seconds after the servers came online for early access back in mid-December. I had been eagerly awaiting it for a while, though I think I was always–at most–cautiously optimistic, because I know how game developers promise the moon during development and then somehow, the pieces just don’t come together at launch. Even after having a couple of opportunities to be a part of short-term testing for Star Wars: The Old Republic, I kept my expectations in check.

So maybe that’s why I think this game is so amazing, because I never built it up in my mind to be something that it was never intended to be, or perhaps never could be. The haters have referred to SWTOR as World of Warcraft in space, but I just find that to be unfathomably stupid. Did BioWare employ genre standard game mechanics? Sure. Why wouldn’t they? World of Warcraft is a good game (or it was, anyway, when I played it years ago). I mean, most of these MMORPGs don’t diverge radically from the general template. I don’t consider that a bad thing.

But with all of that said, this is Star Wars, heart and soul. The other day a member of my guild commented that he felt as though his character was an actual character from the movies, and I think that encapsulates BioWare’s ultimate success on this title.

The image is of my Sith Warrior who is, in every way, the baddest of asses. I’ve almost reached the level cap with him, and I’ve had a blast. Combat, dialogue decisions, interactions with my companion characters, etc. Look, I like it all, but the reason I think SWTOR is such a game changer is–as BioWare have always said–the fully-voiced dialogue. Perhaps only EA’s accountants know how much they spent to get every single quest giver a quality voice actor, but I’ll be damned if it wasn’t a crazy smart investment, because in my opinion, it literally puts SWTOR in a different class from any other MMORPG that’s out right now. Playing the game does often feel like an interactive cinematic experience.

Anyway, this probably deserves a way more thorough review than I intended to provide here, but at the very least, I think this one is worth playing for the first month just to try to play through the class storyline of a single class, because this truly benefits from the start to finish theme park experience of a single-player RPG combined with the social benefits of an MMO.

And that’s all I’m going to say about that.

A trailer through the eyes of Michael Bay

I think I’m one of the last people on the planet who still isn’t talking shit about Michael Bay, especially in light of the Transformer films (the last two of which I haven’t seen). I do feel a little bit cheated by the trajectory of his filmmaking, because after The Island, I really thought we’d see him exercising more of his storytelling chops, but he seems to be moving further and further away real characters and cohesive plotlines.

Anyway, it kind of made me laugh when I saw a commercial for the new Need for Speed game the other day that began with the prominent statment, “A trailer through the eyes of Michael Bay”.  The guy already has the reputation of making films with all the reality of a video game, so I suppose it’s a natural fit for him to direct a trailer for one, though I don’t know it’s necessarily the best career move. Regardless, I went online to check out the full trailer.

YouTube Preview Image

Yup…that’s a trailer for a video game all right. I doubt it benefits in any way from having Michael Bay direct it. Honestly, I’m not even sure what Michael Bay did here. What does “through the eyes” even mean? Maybe all he did was pick out the music. Whatever.

Though I’m not going to lie–it does look exciting.

Tom Jones, The Cardigans, and the Talking Heads?

I’m sharing this if only because I like these serendipitous moments on YouTube where you discover something that has existed for more than a decade but you never knew about it.

As to the why of this video…I don’t know. It’s a pairing that really shouldn’t work at all. I’m not even sure that it does. But I love Tom Jones and I love The Cardigans. I have no opinion about the Talking Heads, whose song they’re covering here.

YouTube Preview Image

Also, here’s my favorite YouTube comment of the day:

If I had a voice like Tom Jones’ I’d give up all my worldy possesions and stand on a street corner and sing things like: Who wants waffles?! Hoh, yeeah — wahh haff alls!

+1

Bonus Video!

Remember the ’90s? Man, I feel like I’m a Freshman in college again watching this. I really enjoyed the kitschy, bubblegummy flavor of The Cardigans’ early albums. It wasn’t earth shattering stuff, but it was fun.

YouTube Preview Image

I highly recommend watching this on YouTube so that you can simultaneously enjoy the debate about whether Justin Bieber is the Satan-spawn or merely a faggot. For the record, I’ve got nothing against Justin Bieber–he seems like a good kid. That said, his song that samples Lovefool sucks balls in the worst way.

Hatsune Miku, Nicholson vs. Ledger

By far, the most popular (only popular?) post on this blog is the one I did back on January 3rd of this year comparing the disparate film portrayals of the Joker as delivered by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger. I just approved another two comments to that post, though I’ve long since given up on attempting to answer them all, because really, how much can you say about this shit?

It’s largely down to opinion, anyway, though it does strike me funny that it seriously gets under some people’s skin when you say something negative about Chris Nolan’s Batman films. These people should read what I had to say about Inception so they can just write me off as a hater (which wouldn’t be accurate, of course, because in general I kind of like Chris Nolan as a filmmaker).

This is all to say that the key, apparently, to driving readership is to just be a dick about something that people hold sacred. So now I’m wondering what else I can be a dick about…

Anyway, moving on to an entirely different topic, this is pretty cool:

YouTube Preview Image

A while back, I’d heard an NPR story about this 3-D virtual singer named Hatsune Miku who performs live to sold-out arenas, and I had meant at the time to check it out on YouTube. I finally got around to it.

Pretty amazing. We’ve come a long way from Josie and the Pussycats.

Sucker Punch, X-Men: First Class

Sucker Punch (2011)

Rating: ★★★★☆ 

Sometimes it’s nice to know that nobody gives two shits about your reviews. Like now, for example, because I can admit to having enjoyed watching Sucker Punch.

You know…I kinda think Zack Snyder demonstrates elements of genius in his filmmaking, not solely in his striking use of computer imagery, but also in his visual storytelling. And I’m totally serious. This is a work that could almost be played as a straight silent film (and in point of fact, for the first five minutes or so, that’s pretty much exactly what it is).

I’m only going to say three things about this movie:

(1) I was never bored. At all. I found it roundly entertaining from minute one right through to the unexpected musical number in the credits.

(2) It’s not totally empty-headed entertainment by any means. While so many action films feel uncomfortably familiar, as though you’ve seen them before, I promise you, you’ve never seen Sucker Punch before. You may have seen fragments of this film elsewhere, but never strung together this way or within such an odd narrative frame.

(3) Neat soundtrack, though this could just as easily be somebody else’s complaint, as the film at times feels like a sequence of music videos.

If I’m being honest, I don’t quite understand why it was eviscerated by critics. And I’m not going to bother reading the reviews.

Is it a brilliant work of cinema that 20 years from now is going to be studied in film theory courses alongside Citizen Kane? No, of course not. Hell, it might not even be a movie you’d be willing to watch more than once. But even if you consider the film a failure, it seems you would have to acknowledge that it’s an interesting failure, at least.

X-Men: First Class (2011)

Rating: ★★★½☆ 

Why do the writers of these movies always feel the need to inject at least a few ridiculous mutants of their own creation? To be honest, I haven’t read a bunch of X-Men comics, so perhaps some of these lame-ass characters are actual Marvel creations, but just as an example, this film gives us a stripper with dragonfly wings who hawks up fireballs from her throat. She’s not a prominent character, really, but the point is, she’s in X-Men: First Class, and when you see a character like that, it makes you cry a little bit for all of the awesome mutants they could have employed instead.

Also, there’s a character that’s just Nightcrawler except he’s red and Russian. Get it? And there’s another guy whose “ability to adapt” somehow allows him to encase his torso in a turtle shell. Or something.

Nitpicking aside, this wasn’t a bad origin story for the X-Men. It hits all the notes: Magneto’s beginnings during the Holocaust, the friendship between Xavier and Magneto, the romance between Xavier and Moira McTaggert, Xavier’s paralysis, Professor X’s School for the Gifted, and so forth. And along the way, it manages to explain things like how Mystique fell in with Magneto, how Hank McCoy turned all blue and hairy, and even how Magneto acquired that helmet of his. Internally, it’s pretty sound storytelling as all things organically fall into their place as we know they must.

In all fairness, there’s a lot to like about this film. So why didn’t I love it? I’m not quite certain, to be frank with you. Perhaps because I never did quite get interested in the villain’s plot to start World War III. Or perhaps it’s merely because I don’t care much about characters like Banshee or Havok. Or perhaps it’s because I think it may have been pointless to attempt to wedge this into the continuity previously established by the other X-Men films; and even within those guidelines, it still creates some questionable continuity. In any case, you have my rating.

 Second Opinions

Bonus! Random Video

This has absolutely nothing to do with anything. I just stumbled across it on YouTube and it cracked me up hard for some reason.

YouTube Preview Image

Thor

Thor (2011)

Rating: ★★★★☆ 

It makes sense in a way that Kenneth Branagh should be the director tasked with helming this ship, because there is something distinctly Shakespearean in the circumstances found within. The longstanding undercurrent of sibling rivalry, Loki’s sundry machinations all for the benefit of his father’s love, Thor’s arrogance and resulting comeuppance…well, I don’t know if this is weightier material than gets covered in other comic book films, but just the same, it’s all covered here with a certain earnestness that is either overdone in some of these genre films or not quite taken seriously enough in others.

While this was not a perfect movie–and perhaps not even a perfect Thor movie–it nevertheless captures the sense of wonder and imagination that have been the hallmarks of this character when he has been at his best over the many decades of his existence as a Marvel Comics character. It sounds like a simple thing, but what I appreciated the most about this film is encapsulated in the fact that Loki wears a helmet with bag-ass antelope-like horns on it, if you know what I mean. The filmmakers aren’t embarrassed about the source material as is sometimes the case–they embraced it, and the film was better for it.

Anyway, just a few comments before I close this thing up.

Chris Hemsworth: who is this devilishly charming bastard? Stellar casting. I think I’ve got a bit of a man crush on him. Random aside: I just looked into it, and he’s a full foot taller than Natalie Portman, which is probably why most of the scenes between them are played sitting down.

On the topic of Natalie Portman, am I the only one who has difficulty buying her as an astrophysicist? I know she went to Harvard and everything, but I don’t know…

I was very pleased in general with the film’s casting. Ray Stevenson (Titus Pullo from Rome) as Volstagg; Anthony Hopkins as Odin, giving a real performance instead of a “comic book movie performance”, the way a lot of guys in his position might do; and Tom Hiddleston–whom I’d never seen before, but who positively embodies the trickster god, Loki. No complaints about anybody else–they’re all well matched to the roles they play, but those were a few of my favorites.

So yeah…Thor. It won’t change your life, but it’s a lot of fun. I actually wound up watching it twice. I had nothing better to do while making dinner today, so I put it on for background noise and wound up watching it through to the end again. Suffice it to say, I liked it.

Second Opinions

Subscribe to RSS Feed Follow me on Twitter!